imagine living in a time where six men kill themselves every day, and if we walk Basque gonna happen in 100 years. It sounds pretty gross, but it's actually, you know, originally fake news starts is a critique of news that's considered to be inaccurate. It's become a term that's used now to dismiss any news that you don't like and Iran wanted to. Young Australians has a provision. They are unwell generation that
people don't accept. Climate science, if I think about how we're going to save the world, are enables us to move this time on the podcast. We are looking at renewable energy. Energy remains front and center of political debate. It divides those who want a faster transition away from fossil fuels and those who say the transition is not viable. Judah Economic impacts Renewables have long been touted as the solution
to reducing our reliance on fossil fuels. And in Australia, renewable energy is growing at a per capita right 10 times faster than the world average, nearly three times faster than the next buses. Country, Germany. Sorry, why haven't renewables taken? I've yet we'll find out from experts. What happens if we don't make the switch to renewables and the potential difference if we do. What happens if we don't move to renewables and phase out fossil fuels fast enough?
Our experts fear the failure to keep global warming under two degrees could lead Toa large populated areas becoming uninhabitable. If we delay the move to renewables, we won't see the behavior change we need in communities, says behavioral scientist Liam Smith. I'm
Liam Knit. I'm the director of behavior. What Australia High Boots by
10 such department
to change behavior. Individual.
Liam Smith. Welcome.
Great. Great to be here.
I want to ask you about renewable systems. Have reliable. Are they? Actually, Can we trust them?
We know that they're becoming more and more reliable, that they're becoming a greater and greater part of greed, some technologies and more reliable than others. Uh, and, um, some countries indeed have situations were almost 100%. Even more than 100% of the national needs is supplied through renewables at times a long time.
So I think that question is gradually being answered by people with probably greater technical expertise than I have, but that certainly we're heading down that path to the point with Amel, we're gonna become much more reliable than my happen in the past.
And since they are pretty reliable at the moment, then by the sound of it, like you said, there are some countries that have, you know, use it for 100% of it needs at least some of the time. Why? Why Israeli? Don't we use it more? Why do you think there is? Still reluctance
are a complicated question I would hit, hesitate to get probably at a few strings. The anti was the little few reasons the first I think you some incumbents in existing systems. So you know, we build power stations they designed the last several decades, but they are a large investments. It certainly technical capability and skill that goes into running them. And therefore we kind of locked in, you know, the part dependent on the technology.
Ah, there's probably some hesitancy to the uptake of renewables because of stories around the reliability, I guess, increasing in Australia, we're getting more and more used to solder and salaries. One of those renewables, that is, you know, quite variable, depending on the Man of Sun and and then the weather and indeed where you are in Australia. And so I think probably a combination of those two things at the macro level. Other drivers. But we are
seeing people ships. So, um you know, while they historically have been key drivers to resistance, I think these things are changing.
And yet eso you say these changing and look, there are some legitimate questions to be asked. But there are countries that are far further down the road than we are. If are we dragging our feet due to renewable? Just needs better PR. What's the issue?
Probably Ah, you know, I think renewable certainly could benefit from better PR on a bit of reputation. Ah, amongst Australians. Um, there are probably some other reasons beyond that. I mean, I think when you say other, some countries have embraced a much more whole only that's probably a combination of the policy. But my also reason. Very pragmatic reasons. Your connection.
Too much large greed or indeed, much greater proportion. Nuclear energy supply systems, which are not traditionally a large part of the mix in Australia. Um, so yeah, are we dragging it? Think about it. It's a difficult question to answer. I mean, I know that some authors have looked at Australia and say, Well, look at all that space and all that fun. Ah, yeah, You know, you could be a an export country to the world, and we certainly aren't really,
so there's certainly a possibility. But I get back to the early questioning and incumbency and and also some level of resistance.
Do you think Australia does move towards more renewable and gas other technologies? What does that mean for the future?
So I guess I'm a normal behavior scientist and well beyond. I guess the reason I'm talking to you is because lives will be speaking way dealing, not applied contexts and energy being one of those. So I can think about what does the future look like? Behavioral. Easy in a world where we have a much greater proportion of renewables, that that may not have the base load deploy that I called us.
And so I do think the future. And you know, there are certainly many options in the future and hydro hard regions that being one that got the attention of government into the new future. Um, you know, there are ways in which the future may lead to changes in how we act and how
we gauge of the system. I guess at one level, when energy bring, if we could have a better connected greed in that that allows exchange of energy between greed, I think that that's really gonna be helpful in distributing the risk you'll or the supply across brought a network. But that also means that people might need Teoh
behave differently at times. And I think about the Monash work that we're doing in our local in the deer I work we're doing in particular hitting towards um, Well, it's Hockett of Nick, dear I And, uh, that's about the order of the micro level that is a monitor market. But then authorities and Monitor Network, which where we hope to I just be able to manipulate our power use. At times, I didn't uses all power, um, so that we can
feeding or out of a broad agreed as needed. And I think that that's an area where things are really gonna change so I can see in the future times when we might need to, for example, turn the heating up because we can't keep the playschool and when I mean heading out on me, not from 25 to 30 but more 25 to 26 27
or
something like that just to create a little bit of ability in a system when we're drawing a lot from it and equally if were producing a lot of power. However, that looks and that this is admonishing celebrity, it's well, it's all around battery and wind in that mix, but certainly when we're producing more powers that we can export it. And we might either say it puts, um, storage into some energy into
battery storage for the time being. Or we can export its whether greed Jamaican has a change in their behaviour. In terms of, you know, use your energy. Now recharge your batteries. Now with that in a car or something else or in the heart. Home Batteries is becoming pretty popular at the moment as well that these are things that I can see behavior really changing in the future. So
will be, hopefully much more connected. We'll see particularly acid like home batteries, things like the taste of two or indeed, a car batteries will become a resource that is drawn down and feeding back into the grid as needed quite regularly. So they will provide that security and that reliability. So that means you and I are doing a few
things differently. Probably, uh, when this energy, we might use it for storage and when when it's not their NATO, except a few things that are different as well.
You told us what could happen if you know how the future could Look, if we make some changes, what could have you to look like if we don't? If we don't start adopting more renewables?
Yeah, I guess this this this kind of like clinic times argument, Really? I mean, that this is the one argument is, Well, um, you know, the Australians, a contributor were not a huge contributor, but capital were very large contributor to, ah, carbon emissions, etcetera, And that lady global change and causing very least the 1.5 or two degree changing the temperature. We know what that main that I mean, we continue contribute to that which is
not great. I guess there's a reputational images Well, in that you know, monitor. Very Australia looks very much like a lag. Um, it is behind the up, uh, behind the eight ball. Like it in terms of the uptake of new smart grids and technology that allow exchange of energy in the way we have been talking about and very much others get ahead. Both, I guess it through the technology, but then equally through their economies, probably start to possible much more as well. So I think,
yeah, I got a particularly. I think it's the reputation of risk, I think is wearing the short term, but then longer terms that made it the climate, helping others as well.
Do you think there any areas more than others, where if we don't make change, environmentally order, renewable sense things could be worse than others? Like is that is the biggest area for renewable focus? For example, say stopping cold as opposed to anything else. We should just focus on that, because if we don't ah, the part that we're going down is just too negative,
not quite shocking. And so that I think, stopping Cole he's actually really important. I can't speak to the impact that has or doesn't have in terms of climate on, and there are certainly common scientists billions that better than I can. But I do think the shutting of coal station sends really important messages community to people about what matters.
And so when you know when we see a power station closed down on D. C companies saying right with divesting out of coal, I think that that creates the momentum in many ways with which had great moment and not not, not necessarily for the right reasons. On the back of the bushfires at the moment of the other factors are completely changing that, unfortunately,
many raisins with covered. But but certainly, uh, you know, if covert hadn't happened, it's almost certain that there would be a really good policy we know now screening, giving an action on climate change. And, um so what do you think? You know, getting out of coal and having policies that sort of take it down. That part, actually, really powerful signals to community decided matters. And, you know, I don't support the idea of questions. Dan Cole,
as the Khyber researches were often interesting. Well, does that then latest to do something else way more likely, the act. Do something that we likely the dog. You know, after graduation, if you leave the superannuation company, let us alone exchange with Boston. Brand new. I should company the want. Darvish that a couple? Um you know, but but that Will it lead me to doom or things that are interrogated that are in line with the first thing I did?
And we call these behavioral spillover, right? So if I do one thing, I would like to do another another, another several by boat or advocate, or even just support. I'm the idea of causing coal more than likely to divest a call. And my men like leader, you know, switch off the light of my workplace in my then likely that by an electric vehicle, etcetera. This is question. And what we do know seems Teoh mediate those relationships. How much? If I see myself with that kind of person, I'm
more likely did more things that consistent. And so it's not the best answer to your question in terms of, you know, where do we concentrate? But I do think potentially if we had the, um it's kind of philosophy that we want to take people on journeys in carbon and don't just involved reporting reduction of coal, but hope draft of other things that, you know over a short space of time that will be otherwise Australia becomes called.
You mentioned that if it were not for covered, we might have a great window to talk about renewables here. Do you think we're gonna lose that window?
I think we've already looked.
And what will be the impact of that?
Well, so I think in policy, there are windows that happens for a whole raft of reasons. GFT credibly knows. Um, you know, the government to drive, but a windows and we had good movement in planet in peril, environment and some other spaces over the past to the four fucking years. Um, but But when? But those windows closed, they don't stay open for a long period of time.
They can be driven. I think, by a whole bunch of things that a natural disaster, as the Bushrod have done, is one a politician, or later they're putting a stake in the ground, saying this matter, two million, I'm really gonna do something about it, or it can come out of community. But when they get into the public discourse and the zeitgeist, then we have a very typically a fairly placing. My aren't last year. There are the Windows, but significant policy times to occur.
Unfortunately, I think we had that window in January. Onda close pretty quickly. It's really, really quite districting, actually. And a them and justice wake up any meetings from that push bar recovery intensive biodiversity starting in the late last week. And it's really distracting because they know that intimately. And they really love that
very strange and troubling times we're in at the moment. Liam Sweet. Thank you so much for your time.
You're welcome.
Paul Raschke is an economist specializing in insurance industry is already planning for situations in those parts of the world that might become unlivable due to global temperature rises, increasing natural disasters and catastrophic weather events without a move to renewable Sign to say we can't limit the temperature increase to two degrees, it needs to bay. Paul has a window into what that world looks like if we don't hate the science.
Hi, my name is Paul Raschke. I'm economy on this university and my research interested in the peace of environmental, economic, political, economy and insurance, economic and, um, in general, I broke with large data that on topics related to environment, climate change in the Children.
Paul Raschke from economics. Thanks for joining me.
Thank you.
We think a lot about, uh, the disasters of climate change and all their environmental impacts and those terrible things. What could the if things continue unabated with with climate change, what could be the financial or economic or or insurance outcomes of that? Those things maybe we haven't really thought about.
So on the 100 insurance in the three, um, had put out the number of estimates. On the one hand they put out, I've estimates about the potential increase in the frequency and intensity off climate related natural disasters. So there's a common understanding that these events might increase in some areas of the world. So that means, um if these scenarios are correct, we were going to see more hurricanes, more flooding more. He plays in the future, um, income area
and not trend that we are actually seeing. That, you know, not necessarily related to climate change is that people are more and more moving to more exposed area. So think about Kotal area. Um just looking around Australia. I think about how the Gold Coast looked like 15 years ago versus now. Think about Florida. Um and so we have this demographic trends, our settlement trend in addition that might, you know, even increase the future
losses for society in general. But also the future damages that, um, the insurance companies might have to cover.
And so are insurance companies already factoring that in. Are they already starting to prepare for maybe having to pay out form or cyclones more heatwaves? Or is this at this stage still a consideration?
So what insurance companies do around the world, they have a number of different things. First, I mean that the most extreme reactions that simply say it's not insurable. So there can be properties that are in in our example flood risk zone, that insurance companies already are saying, Look, we no longer ensuring you. Some insurance companies are in some countries. We see that insurance companies, you know, refused to ensure a certain properties.
Um, that's the most extreme form, the other possibilities that they simply increase the premium to reflect the wrist, and that then makes it for people unaffordable to live there because they're the premiums are so high, and normally the premium to reflect there is. I mean, it's just making even exposed areas making living grab it becomes extremely expensive.
On. The other thing is that in some on countries, for example, Switzerland, the insurance companies are statement all police, so they have fuel more right to intervene in how buildings appeal. Um, and they can say, OK, we have, um, this combination of not just financial insurance often interest trench, but also asking people to in the Mormon into self protection. And then they can ask you to say, You know, put your house on until spills, for example, or put in
in your basement when those they need Toby Flood proof. Otherwise, you don't get that a precondition for insurance In that sense, state defector that in another way, where let's say the industry of the whole is approaching the climate change, Um, scenarios is on the more broader let's say information base, um, campaign, where they produce research and, you know, try to inform policy makers around the world about the increasing risk.
Do you think we'll start to see Mawr places or areas? People who are in places that are just uninsurable. We might have some now pat saying, Australian, maybe areas that are really prone to bushfires, for example, or coastal areas that look like any minute now that could be swept away. Adds, climate change does progress. And we do see more things like heatwaves, more cyclones, that air that could impact
far greater people. Will we start to see more areas that are either just uninsurable or the premiums are so high that fewer and fewer people can afford to live there?
That could be the case that some areas will simply be uninsurable in the sense that you know, if the government, for example, doesn't intervene and maybe Ted up some cooperation with a some form of collaboration with insurance companies are we provide some form of insurance, then the private tech team a template. They know we're not going to ensure there or we will provide insurance, but it can't as a joke.
You know, we're not going to pay out the full um, damage, but at the image that you know you get, you can buy an insurance and the claim you can make it limited. Let's say $20,000. You see that some European companies have that there Countries that you have, um, with your normal by insurance for your household, you can top up and getting a natural disaster peck touch that
insures you against the whole set of natural disasters. But the states in the insurance policy that you know if something happens, we will only pay you x amount of dollars. Not
only does it sound really complicated, it sounds like a complicated problem. We're gonna have to be dealing with more and more in the future as climate change progresses. Paul, that was really useful. Thank you so much for taking the time. I really appreciate it.
No, that time has a way.
Definitely some food for thought there about how much we need to manage this transition. Next episode will find out just what is possible in the world of renewables and what needs to change so we can get there faster. Thanks to our guest today, Liam Smith and Paul Raschke. That's it for this episode. More information on what we discussed today can be found in the show notes